Literature DB >> 22652364

In vitro measurement of attenuation and nonlinear scattering from echogenic liposomes.

Shirshendu Paul1, Daniel Russakow, Rahul Nahire, Tapas Nandy, Avinash H Ambre, Kalpana Katti, Sanku Mallik, Kausik Sarkar.   

Abstract

Echogenic liposomes (ELIP) are an excellent candidate for concurrent imaging and drug delivery applications. They combine the advantages of liposomes-biocompatibility and ability to encapsulate both hydrophobic and hydrophilic drugs-with strong reflections of ultrasound. The objective of this study is to perform a detailed in vitro acoustic characterization - including nonlinear scattering that has not been studied before - along with an investigation of the primary mechanism of echogenicity. Both components are critical for developing viable clinical applications of ELIP. Mannitol, a cryoprotectant, added during the preparation of ELIP is commonly believed to be critical in making them echogenic. Accordingly, here ELIP prepared with varying amount of mannitol concentration are investigated for their pressure dependent linear and non-linear scattered responses. The average diameter of these liposomes is measured to be 125-185nm. But they have a broad size distribution including liposomes with diameters over a micro-meter as observed by TEM and AFM. These larger liposomes are critical for the overall echogenicity. Attenuation through liposomal solution is measured with four different transducers (central frequencies 2.25, 3.5, 5, 10MHz). Measured attenuation increases linearly with liposome concentration indicating absence of acoustic interactions between liposomes. Due to the broad size distribution, the attenuation shows a flat response without a distinct peak in the range of frequencies (1-12MHz) investigated. A 15-20dB enhancement with 1.67 μg/ml of lipids is observed both for the scattered fundamental and the second harmonic responses at 3.5MHz excitation frequency and 50-800kPa amplitude. It demonstrates the efficacy of ELIP for fundamental as well as harmonic ultrasound imaging. The scattered response however does not show any distinct subharmonic peak for the acoustic excitation parameters studied. Small amount of mannitol proves critical for echogenicity. However, mannitol concentration above 100mM shows no effect.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22652364      PMCID: PMC3889870          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultras.2012.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasonics        ISSN: 0041-624X            Impact factor:   2.890


  51 in total

1.  Subharmonic imaging with microbubble contrast agents: initial results.

Authors:  W T Shi; F Forsberg; A L Hall; R Y Chiao; J B Liu; S Miller; K E Thomenius; M A Wheatley; B B Goldberg
Journal:  Ultrason Imaging       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 1.578

2.  Subharmonic backscattering from ultrasound contrast agents.

Authors:  P M Shankar; P D Krishna; V L Newhouse
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Subharmonic generation from ultrasonic contrast agents.

Authors:  P D Krishna; P M Shankar; V L Newhouse
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 4.  Microbubbles in medical imaging: current applications and future directions.

Authors:  Jonathan R Lindner
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 5.  Recent advances with liposomes as pharmaceutical carriers.

Authors:  Vladimir P Torchilin
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 6.  Use of ultrasound contrast agents for gene or drug delivery in cardiovascular medicine.

Authors:  Raffi Bekeredjian; Paul A Grayburn; Ralph V Shohet
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Advantages of subharmonic over second harmonic backscatter for contrast-to-tissue echo enhancement.

Authors:  P M Shankar; P Dala Krishna; V L Newhouse
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Development of inherently echogenic liposomes as an ultrasonic contrast agent.

Authors:  H Alkan-Onyuksel; S M Demos; G M Lanza; M J Vonesh; M E Klegerman; B J Kane; J Kuszak; D D McPherson
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 3.534

9.  Gas-filled liposomes as echocardiographic contrast agents in rabbits with myocardial infarcts.

Authors:  E Unger; D K Shen; T Fritz; P Lund; G L Wu; B Kulik; D DeYoung; J Standen; T Ovitt; T Matsunaga
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 6.016

10.  Acoustically active liposomes for drug encapsulation and ultrasound-triggered release.

Authors:  Shao-Ling Huang; Robert C MacDonald
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2004-10-11
View more
  16 in total

1.  Passive imaging with pulsed ultrasound insonations.

Authors:  Kevin J Haworth; T Douglas Mast; Kirthi Radhakrishnan; Mark T Burgess; Jonathan A Kopechek; Shao-Ling Huang; David D McPherson; Christy K Holland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Impulse response method for characterization of echogenic liposomes.

Authors:  Jason L Raymond; Ying Luan; Tom van Rooij; Klazina Kooiman; Shao-Ling Huang; David D McPherson; Michel Versluis; Nico de Jong; Christy K Holland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Role of freeze-drying in the presence of mannitol on the echogenicity of echogenic liposomes.

Authors:  Krishna N Kumar; Sanku Mallik; Kausik Sarkar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Multifunctional polymersomes for cytosolic delivery of gemcitabine and doxorubicin to cancer cells.

Authors:  Rahul Nahire; Manas K Haldar; Shirshendu Paul; Avinash H Ambre; Varsha Meghnani; Buddhadev Layek; Kalpana S Katti; Kara N Gange; Jagdish Singh; Kausik Sarkar; Sanku Mallik
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 12.479

5.  Encapsulated microbubbles and echogenic liposomes for contrast ultrasound imaging and targeted drug delivery.

Authors:  Shirshendu Paul; Rahul Nahire; Sanku Mallik; Kausik Sarkar
Journal:  Comput Mech       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.014

6.  Ultrasound enhanced matrix metalloproteinase-9 triggered release of contents from echogenic liposomes.

Authors:  Rahul Nahire; Shirshendu Paul; Michael D Scott; Raushan K Singh; Wallace W Muhonen; John Shabb; Kara N Gange; D K Srivastava; Kausik Sarkar; Sanku Mallik
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 4.939

7.  Stability of echogenic liposomes as a blood pool ultrasound contrast agent in a physiologic flow phantom.

Authors:  Kirthi Radhakrishnan; Kevin J Haworth; Shao-Ling Huang; Melvin E Klegerman; David D McPherson; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2012-08-25       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Polymer-coated echogenic lipid nanoparticles with dual release triggers.

Authors:  Rahul Nahire; Manas K Haldar; Shirshendu Paul; Anaas Mergoum; Avinash H Ambre; Kalpana S Katti; Kara N Gange; D K Srivastava; Kausik Sarkar; Sanku Mallik
Journal:  Biomacromolecules       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 6.988

9.  Broadband attenuation measurements of phospholipid-shelled ultrasound contrast agents.

Authors:  Jason L Raymond; Kevin J Haworth; Kenneth B Bader; Kirthi Radhakrishnan; Joseph K Griffin; Shao-Ling Huang; David D McPherson; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 2.998

10.  Determination of the interfacial rheological properties of a poly(DL-lactic acid)-encapsulated contrast agent using in vitro attenuation and scattering.

Authors:  Shirshendu Paul; Daniel Russakow; Tyler Rodgers; Kausik Sarkar; Michael Cochran; Margaret A Wheatley
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 2.998

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.